Reconsidering the use of rankings in the valuation of health states: a model for estimating cardinal values from ordinal data

BACKGROUND: In survey studies on health-state valuations, ordinal ranking exercises often are used as precursors to other elicitation methods such as the time trade-off (TTO) or standard gamble, but the ranking data have not been used in deriving cardinal valuations. This study reconsiders the role of ordinal ranks in valuing health and introduces a new approach to estimate interval-scaled valuations based on aggregate ranking data. METHODS: Analyses were undertaken on data from a previously published general population survey study in the United Kingdom that included rankings and TTO values for hypothetical states described using the EQ-5D classification system. The EQ-5D includes five domains (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression) with three possible levels on each. Rank data were analysed using a random utility model, operationalized through conditional logit regression. In the statistical model, probabilities of observed rankings were related to the latent utilities of different health states, modeled as a linear function of EQ-5D domain scores, as in previously reported EQ-5D valuation functions. Predicted valuations based on the conditional logit model were compared to observed TTO values for the 42 states in the study and to predictions based on a model estimated directly from the TTO values. Models were evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) between predictions and mean observations, and the root mean squared error of predictions at the individual level. RESULTS: Agreement between predicted valuations from the rank model and observed TTO values was very high, with an ICC of 0.97, only marginally lower than for predictions based on the model estimated directly from TTO values (ICC = 0.99). Individual-level errors were also comparable in the two models, with root mean squared errors of 0.503 and 0.496 for the rank-based and TTO-based predictions, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Modeling health-state valuations based on ordinal ranks can provide results that are similar to those obtained from more widely analyzed valuation techniques such as the TTO. The information content in aggregate ranking data is not currently exploited to full advantage. The possibility of estimating cardinal valuations from ordinal ranks could also simplify future data collection dramatically and facilitate wider empirical study of health-state valuations in diverse settings and population groups

Individual differences in the use of the response scale determine valuations of hypothetical health states: an empirical study

Background. The effects of socio-demographic characteristics of the respondent, including age, on valuation scores of hypothetical health states remain inconclusive. Therefore, we analyzed data from a study designed to discriminate between the effects of respondents' age and time preference on valuations of health states to gain insight in the contribution of individual response patterns to the variance in valuation scores. Methods. A total of 212 respondents from three age g

Transhiatal vs extended transthoracic resection in oesophageal carcinoma: patients' utilities and treatment preferences

To assess patients' utilities for health state outcomes after transhiatal or transthoracic oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer and to investigate the patients' treatment preferences for either procedure. The study group consisted of 48 patients who had undergone either transhiatal or transthoracic oesophagectomy. In an interview they were presented with eight possible health states following oesophagectomy. Visual Analogue Scale and standard gamble techniques were used to measure utilities. Treatment preference for either transhiatal or transthoracic oesophagectomy was assessed. Highest scores were found for the patients' own current health state (Visual Analogue Scale: 0.77; standard gamble: 0.97). Lowest scores were elicited for the health state ‘irresectable tumour’ (Visual Analogue Scale: 0.13; standard gamble: 0.34). The Visual Analogue Scale method produced lower estimates (P<0.001) than the standard gamble method for all health states. Most patient characteristics and clinical factors did not correlate with the utilities. Ninety-five per cent of patients who underwent a transthoracic procedure and 52% of patients who underwent a transhiatal resection would prefer the transthoracic treatment. No significant associations between any patient characteristics or clinical characteristics and treatment preference were found. Utilities after transhiatal or transthoracic oesophagectomy were robust because they generally did not vary by patient or clinical characteristics. Overall, most patients preferred the transthoracic procedure

Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 10. Integrating values and consumer involvement

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO), like many other organisations around the world, has recognised the need to use more rigorous processes to ensure that health care recommendations are informed by the best available research evidence. This is the 10(th )of a series of 16 reviews that have been prepared as background for advice from the WHO Advisory Committee on Health Research to WHO on how to achieve this. OBJECTIVES: We reviewed the literature on integrating values and consumers in guideline development. METHODS: We searched PubMed and three databases of methodological studies for existing systematic reviews and relevant methodological research. We reviewed the titles of all citations and retrieved abstracts and full text articles if the citations appeared relevant to the topic. We checked the reference lists of articles relevant to the questions and used snowballing as a technique to obtain additional information. We did not conduct a full systematic review ourselves. Our conclusions based on the available evidence, consideration of what WHO and other organisations are doing and logical arguments. KEY QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS: We did not find a systematic review of methods for integrating values in guidelines, but we found several systematic reviews that dealt with related topics. Whose values should WHO use when making recommendations? • Values, the relative importance or worth of a state or consequences of a decision (outcomes relating to benefits, harms, burden and costs), play a role in every recommendation. Ethical considerations, concepts that determine what is right, also play a role. • The values used in making recommendations should reflect those of the people affected. Judgements should be explicit and should be informed by input from those affected (including citizens, patients, clinicians and policy makers). • When differences in values may lead to different decisions or there is uncertainty about values, this should also be explicit. If differences in values are likely to affect a decision, such that people in different setting would likely make different choices about interventions or actions based on differences in their values, global recommendations should be explicit in terms of which values were applied and allow for adaptation after incorporating local values. How should WHO ensure that appropriate values are integrated in recommendations? • All WHO guideline groups should uniformly apply explicit, transparent and clearly described methods for integrating values. • WHO should consider involving relevant stakeholders if this is feasible and efficient. • WHO should develop a checklist for guidelines panels to help them to ensure that ethical considerations relevant to recommendations are addressed explicitly and transparently. How should users and consumers be involved in generating recommendations? • Including consumers in groups that are making global recommendations presents major challenges with respect to the impossibility of including a representative spectrum of consumers from a variety of cultures and settings. Nonetheless, consideration should be given to including consumers in groups who are able to challenge assumptions that are made about the values used for making recommendations, rather than represent the values of consumers around the world. • WHO should establish a network to facilitate involvement of users. • Draft recommendations should be reviewed by consumers, who should be asked explicitly to consider the values that were used. How should values be presented in recommendations? • Recommendations should include a description of how decisions were made about the relative importance of the consequences (benefits, harms and costs) of a decision. • Values that influence recommendations should be reported along with the research evidence underlying recommendations. • When differences in values would lead to different decisions or there is important uncertainty about values that are critical to a decision, this should be flagged and reflected in the strength of the recommendation. • Adaptable guideline templates that allow for integration of different values should be developed and used when differences in values are likely to be critical to a decision

Maximal endurable time states and the standard gamble: more preference reversals

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: The time trade off (TTO) method is not sensitive to maximal endurable time preferences, as preference reversals occur. The standard gamble (SG) method has not been tested regarding its sensitivity to maximal endurable time preferences. OBJECTIVE: This study investigates whether preference reversals occur for the SG method as well. METHODS: Fifty-nine respondents stated for several migraine health states their preference for living 10 or 20 years in that state. A migraine state was selected for which a respondent preferred 10-20 years, a maximal endurable time preference. Two probability equivalent gambles were obtained for the migraine states lasting 10 and 20 years, respectively. Preference reversals occurred when the gamble, equivalent to the longer duration, was preferred to the gamble equivalent to the shorter duration. RESULTS: Out of 59 respondents, 48 had maximal endurable time preferences. Of these 48 respondents, 34 (71 %) showed a preference reversal. This percentage differed significantly from chance, that is 50 % (P = 0.004), indicating that preference reversals occurred reliably. CONCLUSION: The observed reversal rate for the standard gamble is similar to rates observed previously with the TTO method. Utility measurement of poor health states is problematic, both with the TTO and standard gamble methods

Testing the interval-level measurement property of multi-item visual analogue scales.

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: Conditions were studied that may invalidate health-state values derived from the visual analogue scale (VAS). METHODS: Respondents were asked to place cards with descriptions of EQ-5D health states on a 20 cm EuroQol VAS and modified versions of it, positioning them such that the distances between the states reflect their valuation for these states. Anchor-point bias was examined using the standard EuroQol VAS (n = 212) and a modified version (n = 97) with a different lower anchor. Context bias was examined in another group of respondents (n = 112) who valued three different sets of EQ-5D health states. Marker bias was studied in yet another group of respondents (n = 100) who placed the same EQ-5D states on the standard EuroQol VAS and on a modified VAS without anchors, categories, or measurement markers. RESULTS: No indication for the existence of the anchor-point and the marker bias was found. However, the VAS valuations were significantly affected by the context of the set of health states in the scaling task. CONCLUSION: Advanced methodologies should be incorporated in VAS valuation studies to deal with the context bias